> Within energy technology circles there is growing optimism that the
> world's energy needs (expected to increase 1.6 times by 2015) can be met
> without polluting the atmosphere or degrading the globe. The optimists
> are looking to new finds of vast reserves of non-polluting natural gas
> and the slow-but-steady comeback of nuclear power.
Non-polluting? Last time I looked, natural gas was listed among
the CO2-producing fossil fuels, albeit a more efficient one than
some others.
As for nuclear power, please provide evidence for the comeback of
this notoriously cost-inefficient and unreliable option.
More power there may be, but how much of it is going to be necessary
simply to deal with the loss of biological productivity caused by power
generation itself?
Paul N.